Grayson and Baseball

"Loren Pechtel" wrote in message

> On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 00:27:43 -0500, "deowll" wrote:
>
>>If it doesn't it _should_ have a significantly denser atmosphere at the
>>surface. With the planets composition being what it is it should be very
>>active geologically with more out gassing. The higher gravity would
>>compress
>>what it has more even if it had exactly the same amount of atmosphere.
>
> Atmospheric pressure is mostly a factor of how much atmosphere a
> planet has. Past events can add more or less atmosphere to the
> planet.

You left out one factor. The weight of the air above compresses the air
below or there is no atmosphere. In other words you have to have gravity and
the more gravity you have the more a given volume of air weighs which
increases the level of compression below and slows the escape of the
atmosphere into space.
 >> Stay informed about: Grayson and Baseball 

In article ,
"deowll" wrote:

> "Don Sample" wrote in message
>
> > In article ,
> > "deowll" wrote:
> >
> >> "Don Sample" wrote in message
> >>
> >> > In article ,
> >> > "deowll" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> "Loren Pechtel" wrote in message
> >> >>
> >> >> > On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 00:47:49 -0500, "deowll"
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>> The home run won't exist anymore--no batter is going to be able to
> >> >> >>> put
> >> >> >>> a ball over the fence. The fielders will also operate closer
> >> >> >>> in--the
> >> >> >>> same need to put more energy into vertical motion shortens the
> >> >> >>> range
> >> >> >>> of the hits. The time from a hit to when the ball reaches the
> >> >> >>> base
> >> >> >>> should if anything drop slightly.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>If the air is thicker as it should be You might have some sort of
> >> >> >>point
> >> >> >>but
> >> >> >>these guys ought to be more than strong enough to knock the snot out
> >> >> >>of
> >> >> >>a
> >> >> >>ball.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I'm not talking about air drag. I'm talking about the fact that the
> >> >> > same strength won't send the ball nearly as far as more of it has to
> >> >> > be expended on sending it up into the air.
> >> >>
> >> >> Then you better go back and start thinking about the drag because it
> >> >> is
> >> >> seriously going to slow the ball.
> >> >
> >> > I don't think that there's reason to think that Grayson has a much
> >> > higher atmospheric pressure than we do.
> >> >
> >>
> >> If it doesn't it _should_ have a significantly denser atmosphere at the
> >> surface. With the planets composition being what it is it should be very
> >> active geologically with more out gassing. The higher gravity would
> >> compress
> >> what it has more even if it had exactly the same amount of atmosphere.
> >
> > And yet Venus, with a surface gravity which is lower than Earth's by
> > about the same margin that Grayson's is higher, has a surface
> > atmospheric pressure that is 90 times Earth's.
> >
>
> No moon, it gets at least 1/3 more solar heating, it doesn't have plate
> tectonics or a carbon cycle. The day is about a year long. It's oceans have
> been baked off. It looks like the crust turns over entirely every X years
> more or less at the same time with a huge release of gases.
>
> It is normally said that Venus is far enough from the sun to be in the life
> zone but I'm not sure that is true for an Earth sized planet.

So... Venus's lack of plate tectonics account for its high atmospheric
density, but you cite Grayson's high volcanic activity (ie plate
tectonics) for its high atmospheric density.

And Grayson has a moon. Little has been said about it, but its
existence has been established. From _Ashes of Victory_: "Hughes
stepped out onto the ancient, stone-slab sidewalks of the City of
Mueller. Moonlight slanted down across narrow, twisting streets."

--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
 >> Stay informed about: Grayson and Baseball 

In article ,
"deowll" wrote:

> "Loren Pechtel" wrote in message
>
> > On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 00:27:43 -0500, "deowll" wrote:
> >
> >>If it doesn't it _should_ have a significantly denser atmosphere at the
> >>surface. With the planets composition being what it is it should be very
> >>active geologically with more out gassing. The higher gravity would
> >>compress
> >>what it has more even if it had exactly the same amount of atmosphere.
> >
> > Atmospheric pressure is mostly a factor of how much atmosphere a
> > planet has. Past events can add more or less atmosphere to the
> > planet.
>
> You left out one factor. The weight of the air above compresses the air
> below or there is no atmosphere. In other words you have to have gravity and
> the more gravity you have the more a given volume of air weighs which
> increases the level of compression below and slows the escape of the
> atmosphere into space.

And yet, there has never been any mention of anyone ever having to match
atmospheric pressures before opening hatches on Grayson, or any other
Earthlike world. Nor has there been any mention of people's ears
popping when hatches were opened.

All of which says that the air pressure on the surface of Grayson is
close to the normal air pressure for any inhabited planet.

--
Quando omni flunkus moritati
Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
 >> Stay informed about: Grayson and Baseball 

On Sat, 27 Mar 2010 02:37:02 -0500, "deowll" wrote:

>
>"Loren Pechtel" wrote in message
>
>> On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 00:27:43 -0500, "deowll" wrote:
>>
>>>If it doesn't it _should_ have a significantly denser atmosphere at the
>>>surface. With the planets composition being what it is it should be very
>>>active geologically with more out gassing. The higher gravity would
>>>compress
>>>what it has more even if it had exactly the same amount of atmosphere.
>>
>> Atmospheric pressure is mostly a factor of how much atmosphere a
>> planet has. Past events can add more or less atmosphere to the
>> planet.
>
>You left out one factor. The weight of the air above compresses the air
>below or there is no atmosphere. In other words you have to have gravity and
>the more gravity you have the more a given volume of air weighs which
>increases the level of compression below and slows the escape of the
>atmosphere into space.

Yeah, a given amount of air will scale the pressure linearly with
gravity.

The escape into space is a matter of escape velocity, not gravity. A
very large object with low gravity on it's surface (say, a Dyson
Sphere) can hold atmosphere, a very small object with high gravity (I
don't believe any such objects can exist without a gravity generator)
won't be able to.
 >> Stay informed about: Grayson and Baseball 

"Don Sample" wrote in message

> In article ,
> "deowll" wrote:
>
>> "Loren Pechtel" wrote in message
>>
>> > On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 00:27:43 -0500, "deowll" wrote:
>> >
>> >>If it doesn't it _should_ have a significantly denser atmosphere at the
>> >>surface. With the planets composition being what it is it should be
>> >>very
>> >>active geologically with more out gassing. The higher gravity would
>> >>compress
>> >>what it has more even if it had exactly the same amount of atmosphere.
>> >
>> > Atmospheric pressure is mostly a factor of how much atmosphere a
>> > planet has. Past events can add more or less atmosphere to the
>> > planet.
>>
>> You left out one factor. The weight of the air above compresses the air
>> below or there is no atmosphere. In other words you have to have gravity
>> and
>> the more gravity you have the more a given volume of air weighs which
>> increases the level of compression below and slows the escape of the
>> atmosphere into space.
>
> And yet, there has never been any mention of anyone ever having to match
> atmospheric pressures before opening hatches on Grayson, or any other
> Earthlike world. Nor has there been any mention of people's ears
> popping when hatches were opened.
>
> All of which says that the air pressure on the surface of Grayson is
> close to the normal air pressure for any inhabited planet.

Close is not the same and of course they match pressures! You pull a dumb
butt trick like not matching pressure and somebody is going to be bleeding
from their ears and nose! That would be true of low altitude cities to high
altitude cities on Earth! A lot of lowlanders can't handle locations in the
Andes or Tibet. They get mountain sickness. You can die of mountain
sickness. Some of these highlanders can't handle sea level and that's with
weeks to adjust. This is of course the same planet!

I think Trevers star has enough of a problem that some of the planet isn't
even inhabited or at least started off that way. I'd need to go back and
check because I could be confabulating with another book that did touch on
the issue but I seem to recall that the first colony was in the highlands.

The fact is you can stand some moderately high presures as long as the air
mix is right as in deep sea diving. I don't see two or three bars as a major
issue. A little tinkering with your genes and a lot of time to adjust and
you could stand a lot more.

That DW didn't care to go into this is not a big issue with me. That many
planets with life are going to be rather smaller than earth with a rather
thinner atmosphere kind of like we once hoped Mars was is more than slightly
obvious just as many are going to be high gravity thick atmosphere however
those may tend to be ocean worlds in the real universe with only a few small
land masses if any. The no land ones may not be all that attractive for
colonization. I do recall that one Havenite was said to be from a low
gravity planet. The only reason I remember is that this is the first time
and so far only time DW noted such a person to my knowledge. Nearly every in
habited planet must be almost Earth normal. The odd thing is DW seems to
think low gravity equals small and high gravity equals large when in
practice the fastest way to adjust to low gravity is to be smaller.

I would further note than even a Mars type planet is likely to be well worth
mining in an HH universe especially if it has a habitable planet in the
system. It could end up with a decent sized population though the people
that had adjusted it it might die if they tried to live on earth due to the
strain of trying to cope with the much higher gravity off earth. They might
also have been running on very thin air which would cause another problem.


>
> --
> Quando omni flunkus moritati
> Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
 >> Stay informed about: Grayson and Baseball 

"Don Sample" wrote in message

> In article ,
> "deowll" wrote:
>
>> "Don Sample" wrote in message
>>
>> > In article ,
>> > "deowll" wrote:
>> >
>> >> "Don Sample" wrote in message
>> >>
>> >> > In article ,
>> >> > "deowll" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> "Loren Pechtel" wrote in message
>> >> >>
>> >> >> > On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 00:47:49 -0500, "deowll"
>> >> >> > wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >>> The home run won't exist anymore--no batter is going to be able
>> >> >> >>> to
>> >> >> >>> put
>> >> >> >>> a ball over the fence. The fielders will also operate closer
>> >> >> >>> in--the
>> >> >> >>> same need to put more energy into vertical motion shortens the
>> >> >> >>> range
>> >> >> >>> of the hits. The time from a hit to when the ball reaches the
>> >> >> >>> base
>> >> >> >>> should if anything drop slightly.
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>If the air is thicker as it should be You might have some sort of
>> >> >> >>point
>> >> >> >>but
>> >> >> >>these guys ought to be more than strong enough to knock the snot
>> >> >> >>out
>> >> >> >>of
>> >> >> >>a
>> >> >> >>ball.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I'm not talking about air drag. I'm talking about the fact that
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> > same strength won't send the ball nearly as far as more of it has
>> >> >> > to
>> >> >> > be expended on sending it up into the air.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Then you better go back and start thinking about the drag because
>> >> >> it
>> >> >> is
>> >> >> seriously going to slow the ball.
>> >> >
>> >> > I don't think that there's reason to think that Grayson has a much
>> >> > higher atmospheric pressure than we do.
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> If it doesn't it _should_ have a significantly denser atmosphere at
>> >> the
>> >> surface. With the planets composition being what it is it should be
>> >> very
>> >> active geologically with more out gassing. The higher gravity would
>> >> compress
>> >> what it has more even if it had exactly the same amount of atmosphere.
>> >
>> > And yet Venus, with a surface gravity which is lower than Earth's by
>> > about the same margin that Grayson's is higher, has a surface
>> > atmospheric pressure that is 90 times Earth's.
>> >
>>
>> No moon, it gets at least 1/3 more solar heating, it doesn't have plate
>> tectonics or a carbon cycle. The day is about a year long. It's oceans
>> have
>> been baked off. It looks like the crust turns over entirely every X years
>> more or less at the same time with a huge release of gases.
>>
>> It is normally said that Venus is far enough from the sun to be in the
>> life
>> zone but I'm not sure that is true for an Earth sized planet.
>
> So... Venus's lack of plate tectonics account for its high atmospheric
> density, but you cite Grayson's high volcanic activity (ie plate
> tectonics) for its high atmospheric density.

Doing a complete turn over of the crust at once/the same time every so many
million years can accomplish what plate tectonics does on earth when it
comes to outgassing. It would seem you need oceans for plate tectonics.
Venus lost its oceans so it does things its way. Without oceans the plates
lock up and you get the entire thing at one go every so many million years
if the planet has enough heat inside. The standard text book states that
most of the CO2 that ever got outgassed on Venus is still in the atmopshere
and that has caused a massive runaway greenhouse effect at about 90 bars.
Most of the CO2 on earth is in limestone, Marble, coal, oil, etc. Plate
tectonics would produce the same amount of out gassing but a heck of a lot
more spread out.

>
> And Grayson has a moon. Little has been said about it, but its
> existence has been established. From _Ashes of Victory_: "Hughes
> stepped out onto the ancient, stone-slab sidewalks of the City of
> Mueller. Moonlight slanted down across narrow, twisting streets."
>

Venus doesn't have a moon which is what I was talking about.

Mars has two small ones but they are both captures that are moving closer.

Earth has a large moon moving out that is claimed to be the result of a Mars
sized body hitting the early Earth and pretty much melting the place and
throwing out enough debris to form Luna. Some think the early Earth was an
ocean world. Lacking gills I don't think I would have felt at home there.


> --
> Quando omni flunkus moritati
> Visit the Buffy Body Count at <http://homepage.mac.com/dsample/>
 >> Stay informed about: Grayson and Baseball 

On Sat, 27 Mar 2010 17:55:37 -0500, "deowll" wrote:

>Close is not the same and of course they match pressures! You pull a dumb
>butt trick like not matching pressure and somebody is going to be bleeding
>from their ears and nose! That would be true of low altitude cities to high
>altitude cities on Earth! A lot of lowlanders can't handle locations in the
>Andes or Tibet. They get mountain sickness. You can die of mountain
>sickness. Some of these highlanders can't handle sea level and that's with
>weeks to adjust. This is of course the same planet!

Yeah. I've been part of a group that climbed Mt. Kilimanjaro.
(Incidentally, a very interesting climb if you are in the area. You
do *NOT* need any mountaineering experience, it's pure hiking although
the final part gets pretty steep.) *MOST* of our group turned back
with altitude sickness at the 15,500' camp.
 >> Stay informed about: Grayson and Baseball 

"Loren Pechtel" wrote in message

> On Sat, 27 Mar 2010 17:55:37 -0500, "deowll" wrote:
>
>>Close is not the same and of course they match pressures! You pull a dumb
>>butt trick like not matching pressure and somebody is going to be bleeding
>>from their ears and nose! That would be true of low altitude cities to
>>high
>>altitude cities on Earth! A lot of lowlanders can't handle locations in
>>the
>>Andes or Tibet. They get mountain sickness. You can die of mountain
>>sickness. Some of these highlanders can't handle sea level and that's with
>>weeks to adjust. This is of course the same planet!
>
> Yeah. I've been part of a group that climbed Mt. Kilimanjaro.
> (Incidentally, a very interesting climb if you are in the area. You
> do *NOT* need any mountaineering experience, it's pure hiking although
> the final part gets pretty steep.) *MOST* of our group turned back
> with altitude sickness at the 15,500' camp.

Would have loved to have done it thirty years ago. Not so sure about now.
 >> Stay informed about: Grayson and Baseball